TMD Vintage Rankings System

[Prospero]

Rankings

Over the last several years there have been several stabs taken at putting together a Vintage rankings system.  The ELO rating system in particular made this difficult as it was a very complex system.  For various reasons neither of the systems that have been tried since 2008 have been successful.  

Planeswalker Points

The advent of Planeswalker Points (henceforth PWP) affords us a much, much simpler way to institute a form of Vintage rankings.  DCI sanctioned PWP are calculated by event - i.e. your Friday Night Magic has participation points along with a multiplier of three.  Something on the scale of a Grand Prix or Pro Tour carries a heavier multiplier and thus more points.  Something like a casual EDH game obviously carries less.

In Vintage we don't have the benefit of having PTQs or FNMs, so the staff leadership decided that attendance based multipliers and participation points were the best system available.  

The System

Here is the system that we will be using:

Multipliers:

8-16 players: Multiplier of 1
17-32 players: Multiplier of 2
33-64 players: Multiplier of 3
65-128 players: Multiplier of 4
129+ players: Multiplier of 5

Participation Points:

8-16: 1
17-32: 2
33-64: 3
65-128: 4
128-256: 5
257-512: 6
513-1024: 7
1025-2048: 8
2049+: 9

So, for example, let's say that a player played in Blue Bell Game Day 17.5 and earned a total of 15 points.  There were 32 players at that event, so the event has a multiplier of two.  As the event had 32 players, it falls into the bracket of 2 participation points awarded to all competitors.  Thus, this player has earned 32 points (15 multiplied by 2 = 30, plus 2 = 32.)

What We Need

As things stand right now there are three T/O's on board with this - Shawn Griffiths with his Player's Guild, Nick Coss with his Blue Bell/Topdeck Games events and me, with my N.Y.S.E. events.  This is not, however, meant to be a regional rankings system.  At the very least this should be an American rankings system.  Hopefully it's more than that, and it's an international rankings system.

In order to count an event towards the Vintage Rankings system, a few qualifiers must be met:

1.  The event must have at least eight players.
2.  The event must be announced on TheManaDrain.com with at least two week's notice.
3.  The full final standings (with drops) must be emailed to TypeOneRankings@gmail.com within 48 hours of the conclusion of an event.

This is something that I think many players have been looking for and it is now easier to institute than ever before.  This system, like the others before it, will be a failure without the help of the T/O's and the players who play in their events.  If you're a T/O, please send us these results.  If you're a player, please push your T/O's to have their tournaments counted in this system.  We need these requirements to be met in order to have this system attain the level of success that it is capable of having.

Details

We are going to count all events from 9/10/2011 onward.  If you have an event from that time on that meets the qualifiers, please send us the full final standings for that event and it will be added to the points calculations.

If you're not interested in being ranked you can contact us via TypeOneRankings@gmail.com and your name and information will not be used.  

After tonight's update we will aim to update the system on a regular weekly basis, with the new point totals going live on Wednesday nights.

Because of the nature of this endeavor (and the sheer number of players who will be involved) we are going to be using full names.  I know that not everybody likes having their full name used (I don't like being called Nicholas), but it will help identify one player from another.  We have a James Patrick Kohler and a Justin Kohler already.  It's easy to confuse them, let alone all the other people who are going to be involved.  

In Conclusion

I think this is going to be the last time we ever discuss a new ratings system for Vintage because I believe that this system is going to be a tremendous success.  But the efforts of everyone in the community are needed in order to ensure that this comes to pass.  Please, help us make this system a success.

[Stormanimagus]

So let me get this straight: Wizards and the DCI will recognize these points despite virtually no Vintage events being sanctioned BY the DCI? How does that work? Will DCI rankings still exist separate from PWP? Will existing pros with DCI rankings have those rankings converted to PWP?

I do think this is really cool, but it would be helpful if you explained to the community (potential players and TO's) just how seriously these points will be taken. It would be a great selling point for them I'm sure. Good luck maintaining this endeavor.

-Noah

[Prospero]

No Noah, this has nothing to do with Wizards or the DCI. This is a non sanctioned model done to imitate what the DCI has just instituted.

[Stormanimagus]

DCI sanctioned PWP are calculated by event.

But these points will be sanctioned by the DCI? I'm confused.

[Prospero]

DCI sanctioned PWP are calculated by event.

But these points will be sanctioned by the DCI? I'm confused.

No, these points are TMD points essentially. Wizards and the DCI have nothing to do with it. You will only see this on TMD. You will not be able to qualify for any Wizards events through this system - they have no value to Wizards or the DCI.

[Prospero]

The first, basic, iteration of the ranking system:

Anthony   Shawn   8
Ata   David   10
Ball   Bela   20
Ballester   Lance   24
Baumhauer   Kenneth   2
Beaver   Jeremy   14
Berse   Sam   20
Bomersheim   John   14
Borgardt   Bryan   20
Brown   Brandon   8
Brown   Joseph   20
Butker   Joshua   14
Carey   Brian   14
Coss   Nick   42
Detwiler   Nick   28
DiFebo   Dominic   16
Dixon   Thomas   28
Duffy   Sean   2
Edwards   Robert   22
Egan   Michael   14
Elias   Matthew   22
Fischer   John   10
Fisher   Ryan   14
Folinus   Jeffrey   14
Fritz   Asa   8
Fulmer   Allen   38
Gans   David   50
Gans   Jake   28
Glackin   Ryan   26
Gottshall   Matthew   8
Hangley   James   34
Harris   Visna   2
Hundertmark   Evan   38
Hundertmark   Darrell   14
Jones   John   30
Jarman   Brad   20
Kohler   James Patrick   20
Koresko   Jason   8
Liebrecht   Brian   14
MacClaren   Robert   34
Magrann   Will   14
Mastriano   Paul   28
McCarty   Stephen   8
McKee   Kevin   14
Miller   Anthony   8
Pace   Joe   72
Paskoff   Brian   14
Picozzo   Vito   20
Plytage   Michael   14
Potucek   Josh   62
Reitnauer   Dave   14
Robbins   Sean   22
Scalzo   Anthony   44
Seals   Keith   8
Sears   Chris   8
Simon   Hale   2
Thompson   Nathan   44
Trinks   William   2
Zimmerman   Robert   20
Zivny   Andrew   14

A much prettier version with many more options will be up sometime this week.

[Nefarias]

DCI sanctioned PWP are calculated by event.

But these points will be sanctioned by the DCI? I'm confused.

I can see the confusion. The line from which you quote is stating how the "real" PWPs work, for comparative purposes. In the next sentence he explains how these Vintage PWPs work.

That said, I'm sure you've guys have talked a ton about this, but I have a couple suggestions:

1) Add one more bracket, for like 256+, for participation points and multipliers based on attendance. It will probably only be relevant once or twice a year, but it's not a bad idea to recognize the accomplishments of the giant European tournaments.
2) Give a special multiplier just for Vintage Champs. Even though European tournaments get more numbers, I feel like that's really our format's one big shot at the spotlight once a year. Maybe something like "whatever the attendance multiplier would be, +2," so for example this past year it would hit the full 5 points, plus the bonus 3 for a 7x multiplier. I just feel like it really is that big a deal, and should really be treated like our GP/PT. That said, I don't even know if you'd be able to get the required data to even include it, but if you can, it should count for extra.
3) Allow for 1 participation point for any Vintage event that doesn't reach 8 players. The number one philosophy behind the official WotC PWP system is that you should get rewarded just for playing. Of course a six man event shouldn't have the same clout as a 40 man, but it should be recognized, much like the new system recognizes casual events, because you showed up to play Magic. It's not your fault that others didn't. Keep in mind that this couldn't really be abused, because it would still have to follow the rule that it has to be posted on TMD two weeks in advance. The only times I think this would be really relevant would be either at weekly events that don't get great numbers, or in rare circumstances like the one a few weekends ago where weather kept most people home, so it shouldn't be too hard to implement. These smaller events should still count for something.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

Either I really dont know how this system works or the initial list is only a few events. That being said, I am not a fan of the pp system for the dci since it rewards playing more, not skill. From what I know of the elo system, I fail to see why it is to complicated to set up. Once the initial database is set up, isnt compiling the results nearly the same as with pp?

[Will]

Here's a fixed data set in ascending order. 


1   Joe   Pace   72
2   Josh   Potucek   62
3   Robert   Edwards   50
4   David   Gans   50
5   Anthony   Scalzo   44
6   Nathan   Thompson   44
7   Joseph   Brown   42
8   Nick   Coss   42
9   Allen   Fulmer   38
10   Evan   Hundertmark   38
11   James   Hangley   34
12   Robert   MacClaren   34
13   Michael   Hadjuk   32
14   John   Jones   30
15   Nick   Detwiler   28
16   Thomas   Dixon   28
17   Jake   Gans   28
18   Ryan   Glackin   28
19   Paul   Mastriano   28
20   Lance   Ballester   24
21   Matthew   Elias   22
22   Sean   Robbins   22
23   Bela   Ball   20
24   Sam   Berse   20
25   Bryan   Borgardt   20
26   Brad   Jarman   20
27   James Patrick   Kohler   20
28   Vito   Picozzo   20
29   Robert   Zimmerman   20
30   Dominic   DiFebo   16
31   Jeremy   Beaver   14
32   John   Bomersheim   14
33   Joshua   Butker   14
34   Brian   Carey   14
35   Michael   Egan   14
36   Ryan   Fisher   14
37   Jeffrey   Folinus   14
38   Darrell   Hundertmark   14
39   Brian   Liebrecht   14
40   Will   Magrann   14
41   Kevin   McKee   14
42   Brian   Paskoff   14
43   Michael   Plytage   14
44   Dave   Reitnauer   14
45   Andrew   Zivny   14
46   David   Ata   10
47   John   Fischer   10
48   Shawn   Anthony   8
49   Brandon   Brown   8
50   Asa   Fritz   8
51   Matthew   Gottshall   8
52   Jason   Koresko   8
53   Stephen   McCarty   8
54   Anthony   Miller   8
55   Keith   Seals   8
56   Chris   Sears   8
57   Kenneth   Baumhauer   2
58   Sean   Duffy   2
59   Visna   Harris   2
60   Hale   Simon   2
61   William   Trinks   2

[Prospero]

DCI sanctioned PWP are calculated by event.

But these points will be sanctioned by the DCI? I'm confused.

I can see the confusion. The line from which you quote is stating how the "real" PWPs work, for comparative purposes. In the next sentence he explains how these Vintage PWPs work.

That said, I'm sure you've guys have talked a ton about this, but I have a couple suggestions:

1) Add one more bracket, for like 256+, for participation points and multipliers based on attendance. It will probably only be relevant once or twice a year, but it's not a bad idea to recognize the accomplishments of the giant European tournaments.
2) Give a special multiplier just for Vintage Champs. Even though European tournaments get more numbers, I feel like that's really our format's one big shot at the spotlight once a year. Maybe something like "whatever the attendance multiplier would be, +2," so for example this past year it would hit the full 5 points, plus the bonus 3 for a 7x multiplier. I just feel like it really is that big a deal, and should really be treated like our GP/PT. That said, I don't even know if you'd be able to get the required data to even include it, but if you can, it should count for extra.
3) Allow for 1 participation point for any Vintage event that doesn't reach 8 players. The number one philosophy behind the official WotC PWP system is that you should get rewarded just for playing. Of course a six man event shouldn't have the same clout as a 40 man, but it should be recognized, much like the new system recognizes casual events, because you showed up to play Magic. It's not your fault that others didn't. Keep in mind that this couldn't really be abused, because it would still have to follow the rule that it has to be posted on TMD two weeks in advance. The only times I think this would be really relevant would be either at weekly events that don't get great numbers, or in rare circumstances like the one a few weekends ago where weather kept most people home, so it shouldn't be too hard to implement. These smaller events should still count for something.

To address your concerns point by point:

1.  There was concern that the multipliers would become too considerable - that a winner of one large event would be too far ahead of someone who consistently finishes well at smaller events.  Consider this - a 256+ man tournament is a 9 round event and a top eight berth at this event probably requires a 7-1-1 record.  The winner of the event then has another three wins to get through the top eight, leaving him with 33 points on the day (accrued between wins and his one draw.)  Now we multiply that by 6, leaving him with 198 points for his one event win before the participation points add another six points, leaving him at 204 points for one day's efforts.  

What is one win at a big event worth?  

Joe Pace is currently our points leader.  Do six top fours/wins equal one win at a large event?  That would put Joe at 216 points if the events were the same.  Winning six events/making the top four of six events seems more difficult to do than winning one big event.  It's not to demean the one win - after all, the player is ending up with 171 points under the current system, not a shabby point total at all.  Given the infrequency of events in some areas we didn't want to have one player put together a nearly insurmountable lead off the back of one event.

2.  The second point you raised is one that was discussed as well.  There are really only a few ways to conduct this system and another option to attendance totals is to do it by venue.  This, though, has some problems of it's own: this system does not account for the fluctuations in player bases.  If we assign a multiplier of 3 to N.Y.S.E. and a multiplier of 1 or 2 to another venue with a smaller population it doesn't account for the growth of their player base or the shrinking of mine.  It potentially has infighting amongst T/O's as the product of it (why is my tournament only worth 2x when yours is worth 3x?) and even if we instituted a system whereby the venues graduated to various point totals, it's another layer of work (keeping up with every multiplier for every venue that sends us reports is potentially a tremendous amount of work.)  

It's an option, but we didn't think it was best suited to do what we wanted to do.  

3.  That's a very reasonable point.  After all, this is about getting guys to play.  So, if the event meets those qualifiers that I listed in the original post, sure.  

Either I really dont know how this system works or the initial list is only a few events. That being said, I am not a fan of the pp system for the dci since it rewards playing more, not skill. From what I know of the elo system, I fail to see why it is to complicated to set up. Once the initial database is set up, isnt compiling the results nearly the same as with pp?

The initial list is the only three events that we had available to us: N.Y.S.E. XVII, Blue Bell Game Day 17.5 and The Player's Guild #9.  As more T/O's participate, the standings will grow.  As it is now, we only have the standings from one segment of the Vintage community - the Mid-Atlantic.

What Vintage needs, more than anything else, is more players playing in more events.  I readily concede that this rankings system is a detriment to certain players.  Up until GenCon I had played in four events in the previous 14 months.  There would be many more players with far more points than me, even though I top 8'd two of the four events that I played in, and one was a 128 man Waterbury.  Vintage needs people who can run a tournament and people who want to play in tournaments.  Having a ratings system designed to push people to play isn't a bad thing.

The ELO system was difficult to set up and there were a few problems.  The biggest was that not all T/O's were using the same program to report their events.  The system that was created was only able to calculate events from DCI Reporter.  Thus, we were put in a position where many events weren't able to be counted.  The backlog on this grew pretty significant.  

But, even with a better system, we would now be running something differently from what the DCI runs.  At the very least, there would be confusion for all the new players.  Beyond that, there were aspects of the ELO rating system that encouraged a player to sit on their rating.  If there were an award established at the end of this (i.e. a player is considered the 2011 TMD Vintage Player of the Year) then we would have the same issues.  Vintage suffers from a dearth of players and a dearth of T/O's at the moment.  We want solutions that will change this.

[chrispikula]

I think a Vintage version of Pro Player Points is much more useful than Planeswalker points.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

I think a Vintage version of Pro Player Points is much more useful than Planeswalker points.

I think a vintage version of the Pro Tour is much more useful than planeswalker points.

@Prospero: I guess the system is ok, if there is some sort of reward, from what information has been disclosed to the public so far, these rating systems are only for bragging rights, which is why something like the ELO system is more beneficial, since it shows who is the best, not who plays the most.

[voltron00x]

I think a system that urges people to play a lot of Vintage is just fine.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

I think a system that urges people to play a lot of Vintage is just fine.

 without some sort of reward to players who gave higher ranking such as byes to gps and invites to pts like wotc has, I fail to se the correlation between rewarding players for playing more to people playing more

[Will]

I think a system that urges people to play a lot of Vintage is just fine.

 without some sort of reward to players who gave higher ranking such as byes to gps and invites to pts like wotc has, I fail to se the correlation between rewarding players for playing more to people playing more

If one person on one day who didn't plan to play in an event decides to because they want the ranking points then the system has done its job. 

[voltron00x]

I think a system that urges people to play a lot of Vintage is just fine.

 without some sort of reward to players who gave higher ranking such as byes to gps and invites to pts like wotc has, I fail to se the correlation between rewarding players for playing more to people playing more

The old systems didn't do that, either, but this one doesn't "penalize" you for staying in tournaments if you're not doing well.

[halo295]

I like the idea of a ranking system for those of us who play vintage. Great idea Nick. I hope to see this used by everyone

[Daenyth]

This looks good. I'll start submitting the standings after my future events.

[Eastman]

I love this. Excited to watch the race unfold.

[Twaun007]

I love this. Excited to watch the race unfold.

I feel ya, reminds me of playing MarioKart on the N64!

[Prospero]

Nothing has been sent in for this week for Vintage Rankings, however there are a few events that are coming up this weekend, including an N.Y.S.E. Lite at Comicbook Depot that will count towards the rankings. 

Updates will be up next week.  To all T/O's - please make sure that the full final standings, with drops, are emailed to TypeOneRankings@gmail.com by Sunday night (at the absolute latest) if you'd like to have your event count towards the Vintage Rankings system.

[Prospero]

T/O's, please send me your full final standings with drops for any events that have been run this weekend.

Standings will be updated soon!

[Prospero]

T/O's:  Since the debut of this system the only reports that I've gotten have been from Nick Coss and Shawn Griffiths.  I have included my own event in the calculation.  

I'm going to continue including these events, as these T/O's have committed to using the system.  I can't, however, rank players without the reports from all T/O's.  If this system is going to be a success (and not just look like a regional system) it will be because I have gotten reports from all of you.  I need those reports in order to do this task.

So, please, if you are a T/O and you have the full final standings, with drops, from an event within the last month, please email it to: TypeOneRankings@gmail.com so that I can process the points and update the system.

Thanks.

[Prospero]

TMD Vintage Rankings will be updated this week to include all of the participants in TMD Open 15. 

If any other T/O's have an even that they want counted towards the rating system, please email the full final standings, with drops, to TypeOneRankings@gmail.com.

[Prospero]

Vintage Rankings have been updated.

Your top 10:

1.  Scalzo, Anthony – 148
2.  Pace, Joseph - 124
3.  Carey, Brian – 113
4.  Meyst, Richard – 96
4.  Thompson, Nathan - 96
6.  Detwiler, Nicholas – 92
7.  Van Vliet, Clark - 88
8.  Kohler, James Patrick - 84
9.  Egan, Michael – 82
10.  Glackin, Ryan - 78


The full standings:


Anthony, Shawn - 8
Ata, David - 10


Ball, Bela - 20
Ballester, Lance - 24
Bauer, Michael - 28
Baumhauer, Kenneth - 2
Beaumont, Oliver - 64
Beaver, Jeremy - 14
Bedoukian, David - 11
Bergstrom, Daniel - 28
Berse, Sam - 20
Bisesi, Gavin - 71
Bomersheim, John - 14
Borgardt, Bryan - 20
Borner, Sascha - 10
Brassard, Scott - 11
Brown, Brandon - 8
Brown, Joseph - 72
Butker, Joshua - 14
Byer, Jon - 16


Camejo, Jorge - 4
Canada, Joseph - 64
Carey, Brian - 113
Carpenter, Eric - 4
Carpenter, Jeffrey - 52
Chitturi, Ashok - 28
Ciuchi, Alessandro - 10
Cleveland, Jason - 28
Close, Andrew - 20
Copes, William - 36
Coss, Nick - 75
Cron, Kevin - 76
Cutrone, Mchael - 4


David, Harald - 20
DelPaggio, Kyle - 40
DeMars, Brian - 52
Detwiler, Nicholas - 92
DiFebo, Dominic - 16
Dixon, Thomas - 28
Duffy, Sean - 2


Edwards, Robert - 22
Egan, Michael - 82
Egelhof, Tobias - 14
Elias, Matthew - 22


Farias, Andrew - 72
Fenton, Gregory - 16
Fischer, John -10
Fisher, Ryan - 14
Folinus, Jeffrey - 14
Forino, Raffaele - 40
Friedman, Daniel - 59
Fritz, Asa - 8
Fulmer, Allen - 38


Gacioch, Daniel - 52
Gans, David - 50
Gans, Jacob - 68
Gentzel, Patrick - 14
Glackin, Ryan - 78
Glaubitt, Urs - 8
Gottshall, Matthew - 8
Greene, Michael - 24


Hajduk, Michael - 72
Hangley, James - 34
Hanna, David - 4
Harris, Visna - 6
Hoffman, Christian - 14
Hornung, Mark - 52
Houghtin, David - 52
Hughes, Scott - 16
Hundertmark, Evan - 38
Hundertmark, Darrell - 14


Impink, Jack - 16
Irmler, Thomas - 14


Jaco, Jason - 30
Jacobs, Daniel - 40
Jones, John - 30
Jarman, Brad - 20
Joyce, John - 52


Kavanuagh, James - 8
Klotz, Florian - 8
Kohler, James Patrick - 84
Koresko, Jason - 8
Kurz, Amadeus - 14


Lauter, Alban - 34
Lepage, Brandon - 16
Lessard, John - 40
Liebrecht, Brian 14
Limber, Theo - 64
Linsey, Matthew - 28
Linsey, Nicholas - 51
Longo, John - 16
Lydon, Michael - 52


MacClaren, Robert - 34
Magrann, Will - 14
Mann, Frank - 14
Martin, Jesse - 52
Marx, Florian - 30
Masley, Craig - 24
Mastriano, Paul - 68
Materewicz, Christopher - 4
McCarty, Stephen - 8
McKee, Kevin - 14
McNally, Matthew - 16
Menendian, Stephen - 68
Merriam, Ross - 40
Meyst, Richard - 96
Michaels, Anthony -32
Miller, Anthony - 8
Moreau, Robert - 4


Natterer, Ralf - 30


Orcutt, Sean - 40
Orfanello, Matthew - 44
Owen, Alex - 16


Pace, Joe - 124
Pate, Matthew - 16
Paskoff, Brian - 14
Pfeifer, Martin - 22
Picozzo, Vito - 60
Pikula, Christopher - 56
Plytage, Michael - 14
Potucek, Josh - 62


Quandt, Marcus - 14


Rao, Mitesh - 16
Reitnauer, Dave - 14
Robbins, Sean - 22
Robillard, Raymond - 11
Rodgers, Jeffrey - 28
Rudolph, Jeremiah - 16


Scalzo, Anthony - 148
Scherer, Daniel - 20
Schlossberg, Brian - 40
Scholz, Florian - 16
Schuh, Christopher - 24
Seals, Keith - 8
Sears, Chris - 8
Simon, Hale - 2
Sturm, Patrick - 20
Swatkins, Brian - 64
Szamier, Cory - 16


Thompson, Nathan - 96
Trinks, William - 2


Vallas, Nicholas - 68
Van Vliet, Clark - 88


Winger, William - 28
Wolchesky, Elliot - 40


Yergeau, Tony - 28


Zimmerman, Robert - 20
Zivny, Andrew - 14

[Cruel Ultimatum]

Jacob gans?

[Prospero]

Jacob gans?

Yup.  Along with Michael, not Mike, Egan and Nicholas, not Nick, Detwiler.

[Prospero]

Vintage Rankings have been updated.

The Top 10:

1.  Scalzo, Anthony - 169
2.  Pace, Joseph - 154
3.  Kohler, James Patrick - 148
4.  Carey, Brian – 134
5.  Thompson, Nathan - 126
6.  Mastriano, Paul - 125
7.  Detwiler, Nicholas – 122
8.  Gans, Jacob – 107
8.  Potucek, Joshua - 107
10.  Brown, Joseph – 102
10.  Egan, Michael - 102
10.  Hajduk, Michael - 102

The Full Standings:

A

Addessa, Jonathan - 42
Anthony, Shawn - 8
Ata, David - 41


B

Ball, Bela - 20
Ballester, Lance - 24
Banfield, Brendan - 9
Bauer, Michael - 48
Baumhauer, Kenneth - 2
Beaumont, Oliver - 64
Beaver, Jeremy - 14
Bedoukian, David - 11
Bergstrom, Daniel - 28
Berse, Sam - 20
Bisesi, Gavin - 71
Bohlmann, Kevin - 21
Bomersheim, John - 14
Borgardt, Bryan - 20
Borner, Sascha - 10
Brassard, Scott - 11
Brown, Brandon - 8
Brown, Joseph - 102
Butker, Joshua - 56
Byer, Jon - 16


C

Camejo, Jorge - 4
Canada, Joseph - 64
Carey, Brian - 134
Carpenter, Eric - 4
Carpenter, Jeffrey - 52
Chen, Obert - 30
Chitturi, Ashok - 28
Ciuchi, Alessandro - 10
Cleveland, Jason - 28
Close, Andrew - 35
Copes, William - 36
Coss, Nick - 75
Cron, Kevin - 76
Cutrone, Michael - 4


D

David, Harald - 20
DelPaggio, Kyle - 40
DeMars, Brian - 52
Detwiler, Nicholas - 122
DiFebo, Dominic - 16
Dixon, Thomas - 28
Duffy, Sean - 14


E

Edwards, Robert - 22
Egan, Michael - 102
Egelhof, Tobias - 14
Elias, Matthew - 52

F

Farias, Andrew - 72
Fenton, Gregory - 16
Fisher, John -19
Fisher, Ryan - 53
Folinus, Jeffrey - 56
Forino, Raffaele - 40
Friedman, Daniel - 59
Fritz, Asa - 8
Fulmer, Allen - 38

G

Gacioch, Daniel - 52
Gans, David - 71
Gans, Jacob - 107
Gentzel, Patrick - 14
Glackin, Ryan - 78
Glaubitt, Urs - 8
Gottshall, Matthew - 8
Greene, Michael - 24

H

Hajduk, Michael - 102
Hangley, James - 34
Hanna, David - 4
Harris, Visna - 21
Higgins, Sean - 20
Hoffman, Christian - 14
Hoffman, Jacob - 39
Hornung, Mark - 82
Houghtin, David - 52
Hughes, Scott - 36
Hundertmark, Evan - 38
Hundertmark, Darrell - 14


I

Impink, Jack - 16
Irmler, Thomas - 14


J

Jaco, Jason - 30
Jacobs, Daniel - 40
Jones, John - 30
Jarman, Brad - 20
Joyce, John - 52


K

Kavanuagh, James - 8
Klotz, Florian - 8
Kohler, James Patrick - 148
Koresko, Jason - 8
Kurz, Amadeus - 14


L

Lawrence, Robert - 4
Lauter, Alban - 34
Lepage, Brandon - 16
Lessard, John - 40
Liebrecht, Brian 14
Limber, Theo - 64
Linsey, Matthew - 28
Linsey, Nicholas - 51
Longo, John - 16
Lydon, Michael - 52


M

MacClaren, Robert - 34
Magrann, Will - 14
Mann, Frank - 14
Martin, Jesse - 52
Marx, Florian - 30
Masley, Craig - 24
Mason, Daniel - 21
Mastriano, Paul - 125
Materewicz, Christopher - 4
McCarty, Stephen - 11
McKee, Kevin - 14
McNally, Matthew - 16
Menendian, Stephen - 68
Merriam, Ross - 40
Meyst, Richard - 96
Michaels, Anthony -32
Miller, Anthony - 8
Moreau, Robert - 4


N

Natterer, Ralf - 30
Newburger, Justin - 21
Nowakowski, Stephen - 12


O

Orcutt, Sean - 40
Orfanello, Matthew - 44
Owen, Alex - 16


P

Pace, Joe - 154
Pate, Matthew - 30
Paskoff, Brian - 14
Pfeifer, Martin - 22
Picozzo, Vito - 60
Pikula, Christopher - 95
Plytage, Michael - 14
Pope, Brienne - 3
Potucek, Josh - 107


Q

Quandt, Marcus - 14


R

Rao, Mitesh - 16
Reitnauer, Dave - 14
Ritter, Brian - 20
Robbins, Sean - 61
Robillard, Raymond - 39
Rodgers, Jeffrey - 28
Rossetti, Michael - 18
Rudolph, Jeremiah - 16


S

Scalzo, Anthony - 169
Scherer, Daniel - 20
Schlossberg, Brian - 40
Scholz, Florian - 16
Schuh, Christopher - 24
Seals, Keith - 8
Sears, Chris - 8
Simon, Hale - 2
Sollazzo, Daniel - 22
Sturm, Patrick - 20
Swatkins, Brian - 64
Szamier, Cory - 16


T

Taylor, Timothy - 42
Thompson, Nathan - 126
Trinks, William - 2


V

Vallas, Nicholas - 68
Van Vliet, Clark - 88
Varelakis, Jonathan - 14
Vo, Jason - 21


W

Winger, William - 28
Wolchesky, Elliot - 40


Y

Yergeau, Tony - 28


Z

Zimmerman, Robert - 20
Zivny, Andrew - 14

[Prospero]

Vintage Rankings have been updated.  They currently include the Ron’s Comic World event last Saturday, though not the FoW event.  As soon as I have the information from that event, I’ll update the system again.

The Top 10:

1.  Scalzo, Anthony - 169
2.  Kohler, James Patrick - 155
3.  Pace, Joseph - 154
4.  Carey, Brian – 141
5.  Detwiler, Nicholas – 132
6.  Thompson, Nathan - 126
7.  Mastriano, Paul - 125
8.  Gans, Jacob – 120
9.  Potucek, Joshua - 107
10.  Hajduk, Michael - 106

The Full Standings:

A

Addessa, Jonathan - 42
Anthony, Shawn - 8
Ata, David - 41


B

Ball, Bela - 20
Ballester, Lance - 24
Banfield, Brendan - 9
Bauer, Michael - 48
Baumhauer, Kenneth - 2
Beaumont, Oliver - 64
Beaver, Jeremy - 14
Bedoukian, David - 11
Bergstrom, Daniel - 28
Berse, Sam - 20
Bisesi, Gavin - 71
Bohlmann, Kevin - 21
Bomersheim, John - 14
Borgardt, Bryan - 20
Borner, Sascha - 10
Brassard, Scott - 11
Brown, Brandon - 8
Brown, Joseph - 102
Butker, Joshua - 56
Byer, Jon - 16


C

Camejo, Jorge - 4
Canada, Joseph - 64
Carey, Brian - 141
Carey, Edward - 7
Carpenter, Eric - 4
Carpenter, Jeffrey - 52
Chen, Obert - 30
Chitturi, Ashok - 28
Ciuchi, Alessandro - 10
Cleveland, Jason - 28
Close, Andrew - 35
Copes, William - 36
Coss, Nick - 82
Cron, Kevin - 76
Cutrone, Michael - 4


D

David, Harald - 20
DelPaggio, Kyle - 40
DeMars, Brian - 52
Detwiler, Nicholas - 132
DiFebo, Dominic - 16
Dixon, Thomas - 28
Duffy, Sean - 14


E

Edwards, Robert - 22
Egan, Michael - 102
Egelhof, Tobias - 14
Elias, Matthew - 52

F

Farias, Andrew - 72
Fenton, Gregory - 16
Fisher, John -19
Fisher, Ryan - 53
Folinus, Jeffrey - 56
Forino, Raffaele - 40
Friedman, Daniel - 59
Fritz, Asa - 8
Fulmer, Allen - 38

G

Gacioch, Daniel - 52
Gans, David - 71
Gans, Jacob - 120
Gentzel, Patrick - 14
Glackin, Ryan - 88
Glaubitt, Urs - 8
Gottshall, Matthew - 8
Greene, Michael - 24

H

Hajduk, Michael - 106
Hangley, James - 34
Hanna, David - 4
Harris, Visna - 21
Higgins, Sean - 20
Hoffman, Christian - 14
Hoffman, Jacob - 39
Hornung, Mark - 89
Houghtin, David - 52
Hughes, Scott - 52
Hundertmark, Evan - 38
Hundertmark, Darrell - 14


I

Impink, Jack - 16
Irmler, Thomas - 14


J

Jaco, Jason - 30
Jacobs, Daniel - 40
Jones, John - 30
Jarman, Brad - 20
Joyce, John - 52


K

Kavanuagh, James - 8
Klotz, Florian - 8
Kohler, James Patrick - 155
Koresko, Jason - 8
Kurz, Amadeus - 14


L

Lawrence, Robert - 4
Lauter, Alban - 34
Lepage, Brandon - 16
Lessard, John - 40
Liebrecht, Brian 14
Limber, Theo - 64
Linsey, Matthew - 28
Linsey, Nicholas - 51
Longo, John - 16
Lydon, Michael - 52


M

MacClaren, Robert - 34
Magrann, Will - 14
Mann, Frank - 14
Martin, Jesse - 52
Marx, Florian - 30
Masley, Craig - 24
Mason, Daniel - 21
Mastriano, Paul - 125
Materewicz, Christopher - 4
McCarty, Stephen - 11
McKee, Kevin - 14
McNally, Matthew - 16
Menendian, Stephen - 68
Merriam, Ross - 40
Meyst, Richard - 96
Michaels, Anthony -32
Miller, Anthony - 8
Moreau, Robert – 4
Muise, Christopher - 4


N

Natterer, Ralf - 30
Newburger, Justin - 21
Nowakowski, Stephen - 12


O

Orcutt, Sean - 40
Orfanello, Matthew - 44
Owen, Alex - 16


P

Pace, Joe - 154
Pate, Matthew - 30
Paskoff, Brian - 14
Pfeifer, Martin - 22
Picozzo, Vito - 60
Pikula, Christopher - 95
Plytage, Michael - 14
Pope, Brienne - 3
Potucek, Josh - 107


Q

Quandt, Marcus - 14


R

Rao, Mitesh - 16
Reitnauer, Dave - 14
Ritter, Brian - 20
Robbins, Sean - 61
Robillard, Raymond - 49
Rodgers, Jeffrey - 28
Rossetti, Michael - 18
Rudolph, Jeremiah - 16


S

Scalzo, Anthony - 169
Scherer, Daniel - 20
Schlossberg, Brian - 40
Scholz, Florian - 16
Schuh, Christopher - 24
Seals, Keith - 8
Sears, Chris - 8
Simon, Hale - 2
Sollazzo, Daniel - 22
Sturm, Patrick - 20
Swatkins, Brian - 64
Szamier, Cory - 16


T

Taylor, Timothy - 42
Thompson, Nathan - 126
Trinks, William - 2


V

Vallas, Nicholas - 68
Van Vliet, Clark - 88
Varelakis, Jonathan - 18
Vo, Jason - 21


W

Winger, William - 28
Wolchesky, Elliot - 40


Y

Yergeau, Tony - 28


Z

Zimmerman, Robert - 20
Zivny, Andrew - 14

[A.-1.]

Edwards, Robert - 22

I know I should have a lot more than 22 points. Since you've introduced this ranking system, I lost in top 8 to Joe Pace, lost in top 4 to Joe, went 3-3 losing to Joe in round 6, and went 3-2-1 with one of my losses coming to Joe. Now we all know how awesome Joe is, but I didn't know he actually made you lose points

Based on the formula, I believe I should have 113 points. At the very least 50, which is what Will had me at a few posts up.